Antibiotic Resistance: A Battle to be Fought or a Lost Cause? One of the most controversial issues in the modern scientific world is whether or not antibiotic use, specifically in humans, should be more heavily regulated. It is a question which people have begun asking more and more in recent years as the understanding of antimicrobial resistance continues to unravel itself. Antibiotics are a class of medicine that fight off infections by targeting microorganisms, and they have contributed immensely to the decrease of mortality rates since they were first discovered by Alexander Fleming in 1928. However, while they may at first seem like miracles, there is a negative aspect to them that cannot be overlooked, and it comes in the form of antibiotic
…show more content…
According to Buchman, Dushoff, Effron, Ehrlich, and Fitzpatrick “If there is even the possibility of the patient being exposed to or being infected with a resistant organism, the physician is obligated to select and prescribe an antibiotic that is likely to be effective against the possibly resistant strain” (2008). Another issue to consider is how this would affect the lives of children, who are commonly considered to be one of the most feeble age groups in terms of their ability to fight off diseases. It’s very important that doctors are not overlooking problems with children’s health, as they are the most important age group to protect in order to sustain life. However, in reality, the inability to access antibiotics would not only be endangering children, but nearly everyone in the world. “Increased regulation would affect more of the entire population. Because the academic centers follow guidelines more closely than people in the private rural setting, it’d be the people who have their care in bigger cities and have lots of superimposed diseases who would be affected negatively more commonly” (Yousem, 2015). Additionally, it’s important to consider that there are many people for whom antibiotics are absolutely necessary, and making it more difficult to access the care they need would …show more content…
“Nowadays, there are a lot of ‘practice guidelines’ that are published by various medical subspecialties…that suggest when to use antibiotics and when not to. Evidence based medicine provides such data to make up the recommendations” (Yousem, 2015). This goes to show that any mistrust of physicians is unfounded, because unless an individual doctor is at fault, the regulations currently set in place prevent them from making uninformed or hasty decisions regarding patients’ welfare. Furthermore, antibiotics are still widely effective, and while resistance is something to keep in the back of one’s mind, the level of widespread panic, promoted by people who side with heavier regulation, is a huge overreaction. The FDA has stated that “NARMs data indicates that first line treatments for all four bacteria that we track—Salmonella, Enterococcus, E. coli, and Campylobactor—are still effective” (“Fighting”, 2013). This is proof that the way antibiotics are being handled today is satisfactory. Of course, it is completely fine for people to consider how resistance may eventually affect the medicinal world; however, panicking so much that people consider actually restricting the public from these drugs is incredibly excessive and helps no
According to Buchman, Dushoff, Effron, Ehrlich, and Fitzpatrick “If there is even the possibility of the patient being exposed to or being infected with a resistant organism, the physician is obligated to select and prescribe an antibiotic that is likely to be effective against the possibly resistant strain” (2008). Another issue to consider is how this would affect the lives of children, who are commonly considered to be one of the most feeble age groups in terms of their ability to fight off diseases. It’s very important that doctors are not overlooking problems with children’s health, as they are the most important age group to protect in order to sustain life. However, in reality, the inability to access antibiotics would not only be endangering children, but nearly everyone in the world. “Increased regulation would affect more of the entire population. Because the academic centers follow guidelines more closely than people in the private rural setting, it’d be the people who have their care in bigger cities and have lots of superimposed diseases who would be affected negatively more commonly” (Yousem, 2015). Additionally, it’s important to consider that there are many people for whom antibiotics are absolutely necessary, and making it more difficult to access the care they need would …show more content…
“Nowadays, there are a lot of ‘practice guidelines’ that are published by various medical subspecialties…that suggest when to use antibiotics and when not to. Evidence based medicine provides such data to make up the recommendations” (Yousem, 2015). This goes to show that any mistrust of physicians is unfounded, because unless an individual doctor is at fault, the regulations currently set in place prevent them from making uninformed or hasty decisions regarding patients’ welfare. Furthermore, antibiotics are still widely effective, and while resistance is something to keep in the back of one’s mind, the level of widespread panic, promoted by people who side with heavier regulation, is a huge overreaction. The FDA has stated that “NARMs data indicates that first line treatments for all four bacteria that we track—Salmonella, Enterococcus, E. coli, and Campylobactor—are still effective” (“Fighting”, 2013). This is proof that the way antibiotics are being handled today is satisfactory. Of course, it is completely fine for people to consider how resistance may eventually affect the medicinal world; however, panicking so much that people consider actually restricting the public from these drugs is incredibly excessive and helps no